Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 390 - AT - Income TaxAssessment proceedings u/s 153A/153C - absence of any incriminating material recovered during the search - HELD THAT:- The assessment for the impugned assessment year was not pending on the date of recording of satisfaction by the AO and, therefore, would not abate by virtue of the second proviso to Section 153A and as held by the Courts that completed assessments can be interfered with by the AO while making the assessment u/s 153C only on the basis of some incriminating material unearthed during the course of search, therefore, in absence of any incriminating documents found during the course of search relating to unsecured loan and share application transaction with M/s Denim Developers Ltd and such transactions being duly recorded in the books of accounts, the additions made while passing the assessment order passed u/s 153C r/w 143(3) deserve to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. We find that similar view has been taken by the Co-ordinate Bench in case of M/s Kota Dal Mill [2019 (1) TMI 344 - ITAT JAIPUR] wherein the Co-ordinate Bench has considered and discussed at length various decisions laying the legal proposition that in absence of any incriminating material, no addition can be made in cases where the assessment has not got abated on the date of search. Validity of assessment order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 153B (1)(b) on the ground that notice u/s 143(2) was not issued within the stipulated time - HELD THAT:- Provisions of Section 292BB of the Act does not support the case of the Revenue as in the present case, the very issuance of notice u/s 143(2) is beyond the prescribed period of time whereas the section 292BB talks about the situations where the notice has either not been served upon the assessee or not been served in time or not have been served in a proper manner. In the present case, the matter is not about the service of the notice in time to the assessee rather the matter is very issuance of notice u/s 143(2) beyond the prescribed time period. Therefore, section 292BB cannot come to the rescue of the Revenue in the present case. In the entirety facts and circumstances, we are therefore of the considered view that since the notice u/s 143(2) has been issued beyond the prescribed limitation period, the entire proceedings suffer from the jurisdictional infirmity and deserve to be set aside. Ground no. 2 of assessee’s cross-objection is thus allowed in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
|